Trump Administration wrongly blamed for closure of refugee offices

/in , , , /by

I told you about it here, but I’ve noticed over the last 24 hours that the story about Trump’s refugee policies being blamed for closure of NON-PROFIT GROUP offices is all over the media.

Let me be clear!

The blame rests squarely on the design of the US Refugee Admissions Program (and Congress) which has shoveled so much federal money to NON-PROFITS that they long ago gave up any idea of seriously attempting to raise private money to TAKE CARE OF THE REFUGEES THEY CLAIM THEY WANTED!

The program has essentially become a ponzi-scheme built on US Treasury payments to NON-PROFIT groups on a refugee per head basis.  Refugee (paying client) numbers decline, and thus so does the NON-PROFIT groups’ taxpayer support.

For ten years I have been hammering this point—nothing has stopped NON-PROFIT refugee agencies from raising PRIVATE money in the old fashioned way! They could have held more fundraisers, sought out grants from businesses AND from religious groups to tide them over through the ups and downs of the refugee admissions flow.

(If, at this point, they say there isn’t enough private money for this, then that means the public doesn’t want it!)

So instead they got lazy on the federal dole.  It isn’t the Trump State Department’s fault if refugees brought in previous months and years are now left without local support. The State Department can’t legally shutter NON-PROFIT groups.

It is the management at the top of the nine federal contractors (below) who were careless and lazy (all the while collecting exorbitant salaries themselves!) who are to blame if refugees are left in the lurch now, or staff at the lowest levels is dismissed.

Where the h*** is Congress! It is way past time to either dump or completely reform the Refugee Act of 1980!

The nine contractors….

The number in parenthesis is the percentage of their income paid by you (the taxpayer) to place the refugees and get them signed up for their services (aka welfare)!  From most recent accounting, here.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Politico says Trump refugee slowdown is the result of “engineered chaos”

World Relief (Evangelicals) defends its reliance on millions of dollars in federal grants/contracts

Hungarian Prime Minister calls for global alliance against migration

U.S. Refugee program is a kind of Ponzi-scheme that is failing

President Donald J. Trump’s Plan to ‘Make America Bourgeois Again’

/in , , , , , , , /by

President Trump ran on an America first platform. His mantra was MAGA – Make America Great Again. President Trump in his inaugural address said:

Today’s ceremony, however, has very special meaning. Because today we are not merely transferring power from one Administration to another, or from one party to another – but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the American People.

When President Trump attends a rally, speaks at a press conference or Tweets, he is talking directly to America’s “bourgeois class.” Bourgeois is defined as “a member of the middle class.”

Who will make America great, again?

In an August 9th, 2017 Philadelphia Inquirer article titled Paying the price for breakdown of the country’s bourgeois culture Amy Wax and Larry Alexander defined America’s bourgeois culture. Wax and Alexander wrote,

That [bourgeois] culture laid out the script we all were supposed to follow:

Get married before you have children and strive to stay married for their sake. Get the education you need for gainful employment, work hard, and avoid idleness. Go the extra mile for your employer or client. Be a patriot, ready to serve the country. Be neighborly, civic-minded, and charitable. Avoid coarse language in public. Be respectful of authority. Eschew substance abuse and crime.

Supporters of Barack Obama at a rally.

Politicians have wooed the bourgeois class as did former President Barack Obama. Once elected, however, the bourgeois class have been either ignored or suffered under various administrations.

In a April 22nd, 2014 New York Times column titled Losing the Lead: The American Middle Class Is No Longer the World’s Richest David Leonhardt and Kevin Quealy reported:

The American middle [bourgeois] class, long the most affluent in the world, has lost that distinction.

While the wealthiest Americans are outpacing many of their global peers, a New York Times analysis shows that across the lower- and middle-income tiers, citizens of other advanced countries have received considerably larger raises over the last three decades.

After-tax middle-class incomes in Canada — substantially behind in 2000 — now appear to be higher than in the United States. The poor in much of Europe earn more than poor Americans.

The bourgeois class is President Trump’s base and the bedrock of people who will make America great again.

What are the challenges to making America bourgeois again?

Wax and Alexander pointed out in their article:

Did everyone abide by those [bourgeois culture] precepts? Of course not. There are always rebels — and hypocrites, those who publicly endorse the norms but transgress them. But as the saying goes, hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue. Even the deviants rarely disavowed or openly disparaged the prevailing expectations.

Today there are many “deviants” who openly disavow and disparage the most basic bourgeois cultural norms.

Who are the bourgeois culture deviants? Who are the hypocrites? Who are the transgressors? Here is a short list:

  1. Those who labled the $1,000 bonuses given to workers as “crumbs.”
  2. Hollywood which no longer makes films about the bourgeois class.
  3. Those who do not serve their country and are openly unpatriotic.
  4.  Those who would rather be idle rather than work
  5. Those politicians who subsidize idleness and sloth.
  6. Those who create sanctuaries for those who abuse drugs and other addictive substances.
  7. Those who on radio, television, in music and during the day use course language.
  8. Those who are not respectful of the duly elected President of these United States.

Wax and Alexander noted:

[T]hose adults with influence over the [bourgeois] culture, for a variety of reasons, abandoned their role as advocates for respectability, civility, and adult values. As a consequence, the counterculture made great headway, particularly among the chattering classes — academics, writers, artists, actors, and journalists — who relished liberation from conventional constraints and turned condemning America and reviewing its crimes into a class marker of virtue and sophistication.

Making America Bourgeois Again!

President Trump and his administration have made it their sole mission to restore America’s bourgeois class. Washington, D.C. does not want to empower the bourgeois class because as President Trump pointed out during his inaugural address,

Washington flourished – but the people did not share in its wealth.

Politicians prospered – but the jobs left, and the factories closed.

The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country.

Their victories have not been your victories; their triumphs have not been your triumphs; and while they celebrated in our nation’s Capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land.

Today there is much to celebrate, especially for the bourgeois class. Make America Bourgeois Again!

RELATED VIDEO: Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) staying tax cuts are unpatriotic.

Illegal Alien Gamed the Immigration System and now the United States is Suing Itself

/in , , , , , /by

Once again I have written an article about how an alien easily gamed the immigration system and ultimately became a United States citizen, demonstrating that immigration fraud is at least as serious a vulnerability as is the U.S.-Mexican border.

While there were no allegations that the alien who is the focus of my article today was linked to terrorism, he is a citizen of Bangladesh, a country that has a nexus to terrorist groups.

To this point, on December 15, 2017 the Wall Street Journal published an article,

“New U.S.-Backed Force Leads Terrorism Fight in Bangladesh: Failed terror attack by Bangladeshi in New York leads U.S.-backed unit to hunt for extremist ties in South Asian country.”

On January 16, 2018, the Justice Department issued a press release: “DOJ, DHS Report: Three Out of Four Individuals Convicted of International Terrorism and Terrorism-Related Offenses were Foreign-Born.”

What may be even more disconcerting than the title is that the press release also included this statistical analysis:

Breaking down the 549 individuals by citizenship status at the time of their respective convictions reveals that:

• 254 were not U.S. citizens;

• 148 were foreign-born, naturalized and received U.S. citizenship; and,

• 147 were U.S. citizens by birth.

According to information available to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), since September 11, 2001, there were approximately 1,716 removals of aliens with national security concerns.

The statistics did not disclose how many of the 1,716 aliens acquired lawful status in the U.S. other than citizenship, including lawful immigrant status.

Today’s case is particularly egregious but before we delve into the details of this particular case let’s consider that even if that wall is built, an alien who has been granted lawful immigrant status and especially an alien who is granted U.S. citizenship won’t care if that wall is as tall as a skyscraper and topped with electrified concertina wire.

Aliens who are granted resident alien status and U.S. citizenship can simply stroll into a port of entry, whether it is along the problematic U.S.-Mexican border, the Canadian border, a seaport, or an international airport and be greeted warmly by the CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors.

Back when I was an INS special agent I used to joke that you could easily tell the difference between a “good guy” and a “bad guy.” Good guys wake up and go through their clothing to figure out what they want to wear that day, while bad guys go through their stuff to decide on who they want to be that day.

Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet” gave rise to arguably one of the most famous questions ever asked, “What’s in a name?”

Our names are given to us birth and identify us throughout our lives.

However, criminals and terrorists frequently use numerous false names for the same reason that a chameleon changes its colors, to hide in plain sight — perhaps as a method of survival or as a means of enabling it to hide among its intended next meal, a hapless creature that wanders too close.

When we think of the arrest process we think about how law enforcement officers photograph and fingerprint those who are arrested to make certain that they properly identify that person. That issue is of such concern because criminals frequently use multiple identities, that biometrics, such as DNA, are now additionally being used.

According to the 9/11 Commission, the 9/11 terrorists, in the aggregate, used more than 360 false identities and/or variations of false identities as an embedding tactic, to facilitate their preparations for the deadly terror attacks to come.

Not unlike the chameleons, criminal and terrorists use changes in identity the way that those chameleon “quick change artists” use changes in coloration to hide in plain sight among their intended victims.

On February 15, 2018, the Justice Department issued a press release, “Department of Justice Files Complaint to Denaturalize Diversity Visa Recipient Who Obtained Naturalized Citizenship After Failing to Disclose Two Prior Orders of Removal.”

That press release and the Complaint to Revoke Naturalization serves not only as an indictment of the criminal misconduct of the alien in this case, but serves as an indictment of the competency of a division of the Department of Homeland Security.

The defendant in this case, Md Humayun Kabir Talukder, a/k/a Ganu Miah, a/k/a Shafi Uddin succeeded in gaming the adjudications process at USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) thus becoming a naturalized citizen.

He lied in his application and interview when he failed to disclose that he had been previously ordered deported from the United States, twice and under two names.

Incredibly, the adjudications officers who handled his case did not know about these lies until after he was granted the “Keys to the kingdom” that United States citizenship represents.

From the very beginning, his interactions with the U.S. government were based on lies and falsehoods and deception, yet he ran rings around our federal agencies. He initially sought entry into the United States in 1992 at John F. Kennedy International Airport in NYC (where I began my career with the INS), with a passport that was not issued to him. Incredibly, when his attempt to game the entry process was discovered, he was permitted to leave the airport so that he could show up at a later date to seek political asylum.

He was subsequently ordered deported under two different names and yet, he became a naturalized citizen in 2004, more than two and a half years after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001.

It is all too common for individuals to seek to game not only the immigration system but all government systems. However, we expect our federal agencies to be able to ferret out those criminals who attempt to defraud various government agencies and programs, especially when those system and agencies are involved with national security.

In this case we see just how easily the immigration systems were defrauded, leading to the almost comical but certainly disquieting charge in the Complaint to Revoke Naturalization:

II. PARTIES

4. Plaintiff is the United States of America, suing on behalf of itself.

5. Defendant is a naturalized United States citizen, and purports to be a native and former citizen of Bangladesh.

Here the United States of America is suing the United States of America because of clear and unequivocal evidence of incompetence by an agency of the federal government that has a serious national security-related mission!

Here is the paragraph from the DOJ press release that lays out the tangled web of deception that enabled him to successfully game the immigration system and acquire United States citizenship:

The complaint alleges Humayun Kabir Rahman arrived in the United States in February 1992 at John F. Kennedy International Airport, claiming his true name was Ganu Miah while in possession of a passport that did not belong to him. He was paroled into the United States so he could seek asylum, and his application was referred to the immigration court where an immigration judge ordered him removed in 1998. In 1994, while Ganu Miah’s proceeding was underway, Rahman sought asylum under a different name, Shafi Uddin. That application was also referred to the immigration court, and he was ordered to be removed in 1997. Later in 1997, using his third identity, Md Humayun Kabir Talukder, Rahman applied for and received an immigrant visa through the diversity visa program, claiming he had entered the United States by car from Canada. In 2004, he applied for and was granted permanent resident status, which he ultimately used to become a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2004. Throughout his immigration and naturalization proceedings, Rahman concealed that he had twice been ordered removed and lied about his identity and immigration history under oath. Rahman was also never lawfully admitted to the permanent resident status upon which he naturalized.

In the wake of the slaughter of 17 people in Florida some politicians have challenged the ability to conduct background checks of those who seek to purchase firearms. However, no mention is ever made of the fatally flawed vetting system whereby aliens are admitted into the United States and provided with various immigration benefits including citizenship.

President Trump, who made a strong case for vetting aliens who seek to enter the United States, has ignored the vetting process that would be called into action for the adjudication of aliens under the DACA and other programs he now advocates for potentially millions of illegal aliens.

This was, in fact, the focus of my recent article, “DACA Solution Must Heed 9/11 Commission Findings.”

My concerns about immigration fraud and visa fraud have been paramount in my testimony before several Congressional hearings and in my testimony for the 9/11 Commission and was the theme for another of my articles, “Immigration Fraud, Lies That Kill.”

This statement in the news release provided by Acting Assistant Attorney General Chad A. Readler for the Justice Department’s Civil Division will serve as the summation for my article today:

“As our country’s leaders debate the future of our immigration system, this alleged case of a decade of defrauding the United States to obtain citizenship is particularly alarming.”

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on NewsMax.com.

U.S. State Department not yet concerned about sexual harassment allegations involving refugee agency it funds

/in , , , , , /by

That is what Breitbart’s Michael Patrick Leahy is reporting about his efforts to get an answer from the major funding source for the nine federal contractors*** hired by State for the US Refugee Admissions Program.  Leahy’s story is entitled:

U.S. Government Continues to Fund Refugee Resettlement NGO Whose Funding Has Been Frozen by the U.K.

(We reported on the mess the International Refugee Committee is in with its British funding, here.)

miliband and soros 2 (2) close

Miliband and Soros in 2013.

Here is some of what Leahy is reporting after attempting to get something definitive from the State Department:

The government of the United Kingdom has frozen all payments to the International Rescue Committee (IRC), one of the largest non-profit refugee resettlement agencies in the world, pending the outcome of an investigation into allegations of “sexual harassment and fraud” in the organization.

As one of the nine voluntary agencies (VOLAGs) that have for decades received about $1 billion annually from the U.S. federal government, the IRC is also heavily funded by American taxpayers.

The IRC is the third VOLAG in the last six months to come under scrutiny for questions surrounding its leadership and management.

[….]

The management and leadership of former U.K. Foreign Secretary David Miliband, who has served as CEO of the IRC since 2013 and receives an annual salary of $671,000, is now under serious question, and his ability to maintain his current job is uncertain.

The State Department offered no indication that it intends to stop funding the IRC, despite the actions of the U.K government when asked specifically by Breitbart News if the U.S. government currently has plans to immediately stop making payments to the IRC to conduct refugee resettlement operations in the United States.

“The Department of State takes very seriously the prevention and response of all accusations of sexual exploitation and abuse,” a State Department spokesperson told Breitbart News when asked if the U.S. government intends to follow the lead of the U.K. government in suspending payments to the IRC pending the results of an investigation.

[….]

The State Department has not responded to this follow up question from Breitbart News: Now that the allegations of abuse against the IRC have been brought to the State Department’s attention, what specifically is the State Department doing to ensure the IRC is taking the necessary steps to address the issue appropriately?

Continue reading here.

Quick, someone tell the IRC’s new partner—Sesame Street!

See my David Miliband archive by clicking here.

If the IRC does have any government funds frozen, even temporarily, it will be a blow to their subcontractors (working in cities below) that are wholly dependent on the IRC mothership in Manhattan. (IRC website):

IRC offices

*** These are the nine federally funded refugee agencies operating in the US.

The number in parenthesis is the percentage of their income paid by you (the taxpayer) to place the refugees and get them signed up for their services (aka welfare)!  From most recent accounting, here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The IRC is one of the charities closely-linked to George Soros’ push to drive aliens into European Union (EU) nations.

Bipartisan efforts underway to support Samaritan’s Purse exec for top UN refugee job

Brave Israeli journalist disguised as Syrian ‘refugee’ enters German belly of the beast

Aliens Who Didn’t Register Under DADA: ‘Lazy’ or Committing Fraud?

/in , , , , , , /by

The President’s Chief of Staff, Gen. John Kelly, recently raised some eyebrows when he postulated that many illegal aliens who could have applied to participate in the Obama administration’s illegal DACA program may have simply been too lazy to apply for temporary lawful status when the program was in effect.

Although General Kelly had a highly successful and laudable record of service to our nation in the United States Marine Corps, he never enforced nor administered our nation’s immigration laws.  His lack of experience and subsequent lack of understanding about the challenges that confront those who enforce and administer our immigration laws have apparently caused him to come to a very wrong and, indeed, dangerous conclusion, which may have influenced President Trump’s decision to provide lawful status and a pathway to United States citizenship to three times as many aliens as were covered by the Obama administration’s DACA program.

Gen. Kelly may not realize that many of those applicants may be successfully gaming the immigration system by committing immigration fraud.  They didn’t enroll not because they were lazy but because they weren’t present in the United States during the enrollment period and would falsely claim they were if a new program were to take effect.  Indeed, if this program is created, many applicants might enter the United States in the months ahead, but claim they have been here for years.

On February 7, 2018 Politifact posted an article, In Context: John Kelly’s remarks on ‘lazy’ immigrants and DACA, that included this paragraph that was critical of Kelly and the President:

Kelly’s remarks drew criticism from lawmakers and advocates for immigrant rights who countered that the DACA population is hard-working and that the Trump administration is attempting to demonize immigrants.

That brief paragraph contains a major falsehood that, for decades, has permeated discussions and news coverage about the immigration crisis.  The article referred to “advocates for immigrant rights” who were angered by Kelly’s statement, however, illegal aliens are not immigrants.  That bit of semantic “sleight of language” of referring to all aliens as “immigrants” was devised during the Carter administration, as I noted in a previous article.  The misuse of language is not about being “politically correct,” but about being Orwellian, employing Newspeak tactics to alter understandings and thoughts by altering language.

True immigrants already have “rights” in the United States. They are lawfully present and were placed on the pathway to United States citizenship the day that lawful immigrant status was conferred upon them.  In order to qualify to become naturalized citizens, should they desire to do so, they would have to meet certain other requirements such as meeting time requirements in the United States and possessing “good moral conduct” as established in the Immigration and Nationality Act.

The reporter who described the motivation behind Gen. Kelly’s statement as seeking to “demonize immigrants” was so eager to hurl criticisms at the Trump administration that she ignored that Gen. Kelly was likely simply being naive and, in that naivety, Kelly overlooked the real problem: the fact that many of these aliens may be committing fraud and were not actually present in the United States during the enrollment program during the Obama administration.

General Kelly lacks understanding about immigration, not because he isn’t intelligent, but because he lacks the experiences in immigration that my 30 years with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) have provided me.  This includes a one-year assignment to a pilot program with the unit that adjudicated the petitions U.S. citizens and resident aliens file for their alien spouses to receive lawful immigrant status in the United States.

To provide a bit of background, management at the INS in 1973 found that the number of such petitions had sky-rocketed and there were serious concerns about high levels of fraud being behind the surge in applications.  The idea behind the pilot program was to make certain the petitioners and their spouses were actually living in a marital relationship.  Aliens who were found to have been engaged in marriage fraud were immediately taken into custody and detained for deportation hearings.  Within a few months the numbers of applications plummeted as the aliens came to the understanding that there would be consequences for participating in a fraud conspiracy.  You could call this deterrence through enforcement.  Laws only matter when those who violate the law know that they will face severe consequences.

Today, however, the number of such aliens and hence the applications are so great, no in-person interviews would be possible.  No field investigations would be possible.  The Adjudications Officers would have to make their decisions solely by reviewing applications and supporting documents provided by “undocumented” aliens.  The veracity of these documents may be impossible to determine and, since nearly all of these documents do not include any biometric identifiers, it wold be all but impossible to know if the documents even actually relate to the alien applying for lawful status.

These aliens may well be imposters.

On May 20, 1997 I participated in my first congressional hearing.  The House Immigration Subcommittee conducted a hearing on the issue of Visa Fraud and Immigration Benefits Application Fraud. When the Chairman of the subcommittee, Rep. Lamar Smith, asked me if I had encountered a common problem during my tenure as an Immigration Inspector, Immigration Examiner (the position now referred to as Adjudications Officers) and as an Immigration Special Agent, I replied by stating that imposters were a major concern.

Here we are more than twenty years after that hearing and we still have a huge and deadly problem created by our inability to always be certain as the true identities of applicants for visas and immigration benefits.

Incidentally, that hearing in 1997 was predicated on two deadly terror attacks carried out in the United States in 1993.  In January 1993 a Pakistani national gained entry into the parking lot of  CIA Headquarters in Virginia and opened fire with an AK-47, killing two CIA officers and wounding three others.  The next month a bombing at the World Trade Center killed six innocent victims and injured more than one thousand people and inflicted an estimated half-billion dollars in damages and nearly toppled one of the 110-story buildings.

Both attacks were carried out by aliens from the Middle East who had gamed various elements of the immigration system.  The apparent ringleader of the World Trade Center attack, Mahmud Abouhalima, as the Los Angeles Times reported on March 25, 1993, was the beneficiary of the 1986 Reagan amnesty. He gained lawful status under the Special Agricultural provisions of that massive amnesty program, which as principally authored and ram-rodded through Congress by then-Congressman Chuck Schumer.

These aliens may be in their mid-30’s, hence, there would be no way of knowing if they actually entered the United States before they were 16 years of age or entered the United States recently and are simply lying about their dates of entry.  No record of entry is created when aliens evade the inspections process at ports of entry.

President Trump was absolutely spot-on in his insistence that the United States not admit aliens who cannot be vetted.  This was the fundamental concern behind his Executive Order that came to be labeled a “Travel Ban,” which should have been referred to as an “Entry Restriction.” Furthermore, these aliens are citizens from countries around the world, as reported by the DHS.

Let us not forget that aliens who run our borders do not enter “undocumented,” a term that could have been devised by Orwell’s Ministry of Truth.  These aliens enter the United States without inspection and without vetting.  Their presence in the United States remains unknown to our government until perhaps they commit a crime or participate in some other nefarious act.

Finally, an application for an immigration benefit can be approved in just minutes while the denial of an application can take days or longer.  Denied applications may be subject to an appeal and therefore denials require extensive paperwork, reviewed by government attorneys, in anticipation of such challenges. This creates a huge incentive to approve nearly all of these applications to keep up with the flood of applications.

All factors considered, as I noted my recent article, any DACA solution must heed the 9/11 Commission findings, which pointed out how our immigration system’s vulnerabilities were exploited in the 2001 terrorist attacks. Fraud that will likely be committed by future DACA applicants, especially those who mysteriously failed to take advantage of the program while it was originally in effect, is a very serious concern that must be addressed with open eyes.

RELATED ARTICLE: Immigration as a Left-Wing Political Strategy

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Front Page Magazine.

As President Trump shrinks refugee program, 20 resettlement offices are closing in CA, FL, NY, TX and Massachusetts

/in , , , , /by

“We’ve never seen a cut of this size and also a cut of this impact.” – Hans Van de Weerd an executive at the International Rescue Committee.

The slated closures, which are being reviewed by the State Department for final approval, follow President Donald Trump’s decision to dramatically reduce the number of refugees that will be allowed into the United States in 2018.

Warning! Although this is news you will find valuable, especially if you live near one of the soon-to-be-closed resettlement sites, remember that this is temporary and when Trump is no longer in the White House, the refugee industry will go in to high gear to make up for what they will call the lost Trump years!

In order for that not to happen, CONGRESS must dump or reform the Refugee Act of 1980! 

Reuters is reporting the impending closure of 20 offices.

Demonstrating that elections have consequences, it was only in 2016 that the State Department was on a high attempting to add about 47 offices to their roster of resettlement towns and cities.  Now this….

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Refugee resettlement agencies*** are preparing to shutter more than 20 offices across the United States and cut back operations in more than 40 others after the State Department told them to pare their operations, according to plans seen by Reuters.

Hans van de weerd facebook

It should come as no surprise to you that refugee contractor employees like Hans here also support illegal aliens getting amnesty. It isn’t about humanitarian concern for refugees, but is about flooding America with immigrants, like Hans himself.

The State Department has said the drop in refugee numbers, from the 110,000 ceiling set by the Obama administration to 45,000 for 2018, means the country no longer needs all of the 324 resettlement offices that were operating at the end of 2017. This year’s cap on refugees is the lowest since 1980.

The offices, run by private non-profit agencies that contract with the U.S. government, provide a range of services to refugees, from assisting them in finding housing and jobs, to helping them navigate banking, medical care, school enrollment and other complexities of life in America. [Complexities=getting their welfare!—ed]

Opponents of the resettlement program say it is more costly to resettle refugees in the United States than it is to give aid to displaced people overseas.

“The changes will consolidate smaller affiliates, reduce costs and simplify management structures to help the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program run in a way that is fiscally responsible and sustainable in the long term,” State Department spokeswoman Cheryl Harris said in an email.

[….]

“We’ve never seen a cut of this size and also a cut of this impact,” said Hans Van de Weerd an executive at the International Rescue Committee, one of the nine resettlement agencies. [Why isn’t newshound Miliband quoted?—ed]

While the size of the U.S. refugee program has fluctuated over the years, it has never seen an across-the-board cut to dozens of offices in such a short period of time, he said.

Van de Weerd said the cuts could make it difficult for the United States to ramp up refugee numbers in the future. “It took years to build up this capacity,” he said. “Once you break it down it’s not easy to build it up again.”

Continue reading here.

Below is a screenshot of a portion of a very useful graphic Reuters has prepared. Click here to see the entire page.

Screenshot (203)

***These are the nine federal contractors which refer to themselves as VOLAGs (Voluntary agencies, Ha! Ha!) which will lose some of their subcontractor offices (see list here before it is revised). The number in parenthesis is the percentage of federal funding each gets to place refugees in your towns.

They are paid by the refugee head thus the focus on Trump’s admission numbers.

VIDEOS: Pro-refugee Activist Admits She Was Wrong

/in , , /by

She was enthusiastic about the Muslim “refugees” entering Germany and even founded an organization to aid them. Now Rebecca Sommer — whom the migrants called “the stupid German whore” behind her back — has changed her tune. She says that the newcomers won’t shed “their medieval view,” are developing “parallel societies” within her country, and that if Germans “don’t wake up quickly, the whole situation will end tragically.”

(Note: Many outlets have reported this story inaccurately, stating that Sommer plans to move to Poland. What she actually said is that she knows Germans who are moving to Poland.)

Yet Sommer, an artist, indigenous-peoples activist, and UN advisor, has also moved — a bit closer to Truth. After founding the organization Working Group Asylum + Human Rights in 2012, she welcomed the huge 2015 influx of Muslim migrants into Germany; she and her 300 volunteers provided German language courses seeking to help the newcomers integrate. As InfoWars reports, “‘At that time I wanted to help everyone and truly believed that all these people were fleeing hell and were in a state of complete distress,’ Sommer told Polish weekly Do Rzeczy.’”

“With the initial hope that ‘their medieval view was going to change with time,’ Sommer soon realized that, ‘Muslim refugees have grown up with values that are totally different[;] they have undergone brainwashing from childhood on and are indoctrinated by Islam and absolutely do not intend to adopt our values,’” InfoWars also informs.

Thanks, Captain Obvious, as the kids might say. Old maxims tell us, “Give me the child for the first seven years and I will give you the man” and “As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.” Whether what was instilled is Islamic or socialist, theological or ideological, it’s naïve to think people will shed their deeply ingrained beliefs just because they step on your terra firma.

And how lacking is the integration? “Among my past and present pupils, I can count on one hand cases of those who are, in my opinion, completely and successfully integrated,” explained Sommer in an interview with Polish site EuroIslam (presented in English by Gates of Vienna).

Sommer “also observed how the migrants, ‘regard we infidels with disdain and arrogance,’ after they began to refer to her as ‘the stupid German whore,’ a realization that she says has led other refugee volunteers to quit,” InfoWars relates.

“Sommer now admits that despite her good intentions, she got it completely wrong and that Muslim migration poses an existential threat to the Germany [sic] way of life, a problem that will only be exacerbated by the process of family reunification, where migrants will be able to invite their relatives to stay in Germany.”

Consequently, while Sommer says she’s not giving up her activism, she’s now only helping women refugees and those from persecuted minorities, such as Christians and Yazidis.

Sommer’s story is perhaps an example of how, as the old Dutch saying informs, “We grow too soon old and too late smart.” But she could have been smarter sooner if she’d just listened to one particular orthodox Muslim: Dr. Mudar Zahran, a leader of the Jordanian Opposition Coalition and asylee currently living in the United Kingdom. In a 2015 interview (video below) he stated that most of the so-called “Syrian refugees” entering Europe weren’t actually from Syria, most of those who were from Syria weren’t from dangerous areas and didn’t need refuge, that terrorists were among them, and that they were coming to Europe largely to leech off the welfare system. Calling the influx “the soft Islamic conquest of the West,” Zahran warned that the Muslims should be kept out of Europe.

The results of not heeding such warnings are already apparent. Even liberal Newsweek reported in January that migrants in Europe are “linked to soaring violence and crime in Germany.” The most notorious example occurred New Year’s Eve 2015 when 1,200 women (whom we know of) were sexually assaulted by at least 2,000 migrant men in various German cities.

Yet the picture is even worse than statistics indicate. Since the bad press of Muslim crime could throw a monkeywrench into European governments’ multicultural agendas, they often cover it up — that is, when the victims don’t cover it up for them. As Sommer admitted in the EuroIslam (EI) interview, “The sexual molesting of [refugee aid] volunteers happens all the time, but none of us has ever reported such a case to the police because none of us wanted to be seen as an opponent of refugees and cause problems for the center.”

Sexual assault is so bad, in fact, that “anti-rape pants” have been marketed in Germany and have sold out quickly. To get a glimpse into the fear this reflects, watch the 2016 viral video below — which apparently has been censored by the German government and Facebook — in which a 16-year-old German girl desperately pleads for protection against migrant crime. (For English subtitles, click the “CC” icon in the lower right-hand corner.)

Another result of the migrant influx is the development of “no-go zones,” what Sommer calls “Muslim parallel societies”; these are areas in some European countries where authorities are often reluctant to enter and sharia law has to an extent supplanted civil law. Note that while leftist media labeled no-go zones a right-wing myth, the New York Times reported on them in 2007, perhaps before any other major outlet.

As for the moral of Sommer’s story, it’s in part a cautionary tale about no-go zones between the ears. The activist warned repeatedly in her EI interview of taqiyya — religiously sanctioned and encouraged lying in Islam — and says that while Kurds and others fleeing Mideast Muslims warned her of the tactic, she “did not want to listen to them.” This isn’t just a manner of speaking but reveals that she lied to herself. She didn’t say she thought they were wrong but that she didn’t want — want — to listen. This reflects an ideologically constrained mind that refuses to consider unwelcome truths.

The lesson is that the Truth can hurt but also sets us free, and we have an obligation to search for it in all matters — and to shed misbegotten emotional attachments that conflict with it.

Second, while leftists warn of “ethnocentrism,” they nonetheless are guilty of it, projecting their own “values” onto others. Consider that Sommer told EI that she initially was confident the Muslims would integrate because “I placed great trust in our libertarian, equitable European values, and I naively thought that every person must delight in them and take them on.” But why? Are they so obviously true?

Of course, people will resist even Truth when it contradicts cherished lies. But consider that when summing up these “values,” Sommer merely told EI that Germany needs refugees who accept “a secular state where women and men are equal before the law, where we eat pork, where they could even sunbathe naked on the beach. This freedom is very precious and very fragile.” I wonder, could she name even a few actual virtues?

As commentator Bret Stephens put it in 2015, “Having ignored its inheritance, Europe wonders why its house is falling apart.” Moderns believe in “shallow things, shallowly,” he wrote. If our civilization is now about little more than contradictory equality dogma, gorging on tasty meats, and women playing pieces of meat on beaches, then we shouldn’t wonder why we’re slouching toward Mecca; we have nothing for which to fight. Zealous Muslim faith cannot be countered with materialism and hedonism, for man does not live on bread alone.

The issue isn’t that Sommer was ideologically chauvinistic; it’s that she had no good reason to be. Even when (im)migrants are assimilable, there still must be something substantive to assimilate into. Communist activist Willi Munzenberg once said, “We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks.” It now stinks to high heaven as it denies Heaven and authors a cultural Hell. As a result, Western man, today’s migrants mainly come for your money, not your mores.

Sommer laments that soon the Germans will have to “adapt” to Muslim norms. Well, this certainly could be a lesson in virtue, because they’d lose a lot more than shallow equality rhetoric, pork sausages, and nude beaches.

Immigration Anarchists’ Lies Debunked: It’s as Easy as Child’s Play.

/in , , , , , /by

So much of what has come to pass for “common knowledge” is actually an example of how the principle of “The Big Lie” can alter the public’s understanding of critical issues. Immigration has proven to be particularly vulnerable to this tactic.

Under that principle, officials intentionally concoct falsehoods and repeat them at every possible opportunity to convince the masses that the lies are the truth.  This principle was adopted by Nazi Germany in order to con the German populace into accepting the unfathomable depravity of the Third Reich.

Because humans think with words, control of language ultimately results in control of thought.  This was the underlying principle of my recent article, Language Wars, The Road to Tyranny is Paved With Language Censorship.

Today the attention span of most Americans can be measured in minutes, if not seconds, further exacerbating the susceptibility of folks to fall victim to language manipulation tactics. The tactics employed by the open-borders/immigration anarchists to further their cause are so easy to disprove that even a child could see through their warped logic.

First off, consider the game of “Musical Chairs,” which most children are familiar with.  In this game, as music plays,’ kids circle a line of chairs that alternate in the way that the chairs are facing.  When the music stops each child scrambles to sit in one of the chairs.  What makes the game challenging is that there is one fewer chair than the number of kids playing.  Consequently, one child is unable to find a chair and is removed from the game along with one chair.  Once again there is one chair fewer than the number of participating children.  The music starts again and the kids circle the remaining chairs until the music stops.  Each time one chair and one child are removed until the contest comes down to two kids and one chair.  Whichever kid manages to sit is declared the winner of the game.

If you wonder what this has to do with immigration, imagine that during the game one of the adults supervising the game opens a door and allows many more children to flood into the room, however, the number of chairs is not increased.  This way the odds of the children already playing the game will succeed in grabbing a seat has just been decreased due to the number of new players introduced into the game.

It should be expected that the children will scream that what has just happened is unfair and of course they would be right.

Now let’s imagine that we are not talking about a childhood game and that the chairs are available jobs and the children are adult workers who are desperate to find a job.  The “doors” that have been flung open are America’s borders and those entering the room (labor pool) are many foreign workers, deleteriously impacting jobs and wages across a wide spectrum of industries and skill levels.

Incredibly, many Americans cannot figure out the parallel between these two situations.  The Democrats who refused to stand for the State of the Union Address when President Trump noted how unemployment levels for American blacks and Latinos were at the lowest point in years were clearly unhappy. Could it be that they have been depending on making Americans more dependent on the “crumbs” that they offer? I use the term “crumbs” because this was the very word used by Nancy Pelosi to describe the thousand-dollar bonuses a number of companies provided to their employees because of the Trump tax cuts.

Next let’s think back to the days of “Hide and Seek” where one child covers his/her eyes and counts to ten and then attempts to find another child who went hiding when the first child closed his eyes.

Today that game is being played by illegal aliens with great success because the number of ICE agents, and the number of INS agents that preceded the creation of ICE, has always been insignificant when compared with the huge number of illegal aliens who have entered the United States without inspection or violating the terms of their lawful admissions.

Sanctuary city policies make it ever more difficult for the overwhelmed ICE agents to track down and apprehend illegal aliens, even when those aliens are engaged in criminal or terror-related activities.

Of course, the mayors of sanctuary cities and governors of sanctuary states hypocritically draw parallels between their actions and the actions of leaders of the Civil Rights movement who put their lives on the line to right the wrongs of slavery, racism, segregation and discrimination.

Although this parallel is an enormous falsehood, it has been repeated in the news media and by a long list of immigration anarchists and consequently many have fallen for this outrageous analogy. Illegal aliens are certainly protected by due process when they are charged with a crime.  But due process is not the same as Civil Rights. The entire point to Civil Rights laws is to guarantee all Americans, particularly American blacks, equal opportunities to be successful in America and be full participants in American society. Elements of this include access to quality in education, job opportunities and housing.

Illegal aliens are not supposed to work, and knowingly providing shelter for illegal aliens can be construed as harboring and shielding, elements of a felony under federal law, Title 8 U.S. Code § 1324.

Where aliens and jobs are concerned, even many categories of nonimmigrant aliens (temporary visitors) including aliens who lawfully enter under the Visa Waiver Program or with tourist visas may not work in the United States and immediately become subject to removal (deportation) if they seek gainful employment.

Prior to WWII the Labor Department was in charge of immigration.  The greatest concern, back then, was to shield American workers from foreign competition.  This is how the middle class was nurtured and grew to become the envy of the world and came to be known as the “American Dream.”

Incredibly when President Trump, in his State of the Union Address proclaimed, “American are dreamers too” the members of the Democratic Party reacted with sheer hostility, not only towards the President, but hostility and contempt for Americans.

Awhile back I wrote an article about the veiled attack on the middle class.  In that article I reported on how on April 30, 2009, Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank, testified at a hearing advocating the passage of Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation, conducted by Chuck Schumer, then Chairman of the Senate Immigration Subcommittee.

Greenspan was “all in” on legalizing illegal aliens, creating a guest worker program for aliens and for hugely increasing the number of H-1B visas as Bill Gates, whom he quoted, recommended.

As for the impact on American workers and American cities where illegal alien workers were concerned, Greenspan said:

Some evidence suggests that unskilled illegal immigrants (almost all from Latin America) marginally suppress wage levels of native-born Americans without a high school diploma, and impose significant costs on some state and local governments.

That “marginal suppression of wages” for America’s working poor is likely a significant cause of unemployment of Americans and a record levels of homelessness of Americans.

Greenspan’s advocacy for greatly increasing the number of H-1B foreign worker included this justification:

The second bonus would address the increasing concentration of income in this country. Greatly expanding our quotas for the highly skilled would lower wage premiums of skilled over lesser skilled. Skill shortages in America exist because we are shielding our skilled labor force from world competition. Quotas have been substituted for the wage pricing mechanism. In the process, we have created a privileged elite whose incomes are being supported at noncompetitively high levels by immigration quotas on skilled professionals. Eliminating such restrictions would reduce at least some of our income inequality.

Greenspan actually had the unmitigated chutzpah to refer to high-tech American workers as the “privileged elite” who are being shielded from foreign competition.  As an economist Greenspan understand “supply and demand” and seeks to greatly increase the supply of compliant and exploitable foreign workers in the labor pool to drive down everyone’s wages.

The Democrats frequently equate providing a minimum wage of $10.10 per hour or $15.00 per hour with “wage equality.”  This is clearly not about wage equality but about establishing a “standard wage” which would eradicate the middle class.

The “reforming” of our immigration laws for Greenspan and his globalist cohorts is an effort to actually re-form our immigration system to speed the destruction of the middle class.

Since that hearing Greenspan has persisted in his calls for re-forming the immigration system.

Hypocrisy is usually a clear indicator of a con job.  Schumer has called for creating a federal law with a maximum penalty of 5 years in prison for those who trespass on critical infrastructure or national landmarks.  Yet Schumer demands that aliens who trespass on America be granted United States citizenship.

A child could see through their lies.

RELATED ARTICLE: Refugees cost taxpayers billions to remain in U.S.

Why the 2020 Census Needs a Citizenship Question

/in , , , , , , /by

The request set off a firestorm of protest from Democratic lawmakers, liberal activists and left-leaning journalists despite the fact that before the Obama administration removed citizenship: in 2010 it was part of the main Census. They are concerned that asking about citizenship would discourage illegal aliens from participating in the 2020 Census, leading to undercounts in states like California and New York, which have large numbers of illegal residents. This would reduce the number of electoral votes and congressional districts in such states.

By Jay O’ Callaghan

In an action which set off a major uproar from the left, the Justice Department has requested that a single simple citizenship question be added to the full 2020 Census so they can better enforce voting-rights laws and increase confidence in election results.

“In order to assess and enforce compliance with Section 2’s protection against discrimination in voting, the Department needs to be able to obtain citizen voting-age population data,” Arthur E. Gary, general counsel at the justice management division of the Justice Department, wrote in a December 12th. letter to Census Bureau Acting Director Ron Jarmin.

Citizenship has long been a part of the census since the 1850s. The Obama administration removed it for the 2010 Census along with most other questions and shifted it to the smaller, in-depth rolling survey known as the American Community Survey (ACS) when it eliminated the old long form. The ACS is filled out by only one in every 38 households every year, compared to the long form which surveyed one in six households every 10 years.

Devin M. O’Malley, a Justice Department spokesman, points out the Census Bureau reports that such data isn’t precise enough to use in redistricting, and it’s important to have the citizenship question on the main Census form that will cover all Americans.

The Census Bureau states that it asks the citizenship question in general because: “we ask about place of birth, citizenship, and year of entry to provide statistics about citizens and the foreign-born population. These statistics are essential for agencies and policy makers setting and evaluating immigration policies and laws, understanding how different immigrant groups are assimilated, and monitoring against discrimination. These statistics are also used to tailor services to accommodate cultural differences.”

In a recent Supreme Court case (Evenwel v. Abbott 2016) the legality of districting based on the count of citizens or eligible voters is unsettled after the Supreme Court declined to address it. In the Evenwel case, the plaintiffs sought to require Texas to draw its Senate districts based on citizenship rather than the present method of total population.

In a friend-of-the-court brief, four former census directors, who served under administrations of both parties, supported Texas because “the geographic areas at which such estimates are available carry large error margins because of the small sample sizes.” They concluded the ACS is “an inappropriate source of data to support a constitutional rule requiring states to create districts with equal numbers of voting age citizens.”

Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies, is among the researchers who supports the request. He believes that “basically more information is always better from a researcher’s point of view…and when you look at things like apportioning and redistricting, which rely on Census data, those things are always a concern.”

The request set off a firestorm of protest from Democratic lawmakers, liberal activists and left-leaning journalists despite the fact that before the Obama administration removed citizenship: in 2010 it was part of the main Census. They are concerned that asking about citizenship would discourage illegal aliens from participating in the 2020 Census, leading to undercounts in states like California and New York, which have large numbers of illegal residents. This would reduce the number of electoral votes and congressional districts in such states.

Arguments against including the citizenship question “are weakened because citizenship was asked on Census forms throughout much of American history” according to Tony Quinn, the editor of the authoritative guide to California districts, the California Target Book.

He points out that “early in our history the Census began asking whether the individual being enumerated was born in the United States. After the Civil War, with the huge boom in European migration, the Census asked whether the person was a citizen eligible to vote. Beginning in 1880, the Census asked the place of birth not only of the enumerated person but of the parents as well.”

Quinn adds that “with the 1890 census the question was asked: are you a naturalized citizen or not. The year of immigration of a foreign-born person as well as the year of naturalization (if naturalized) was asked in the 1900, 1910, 1920, 1930, 1940 and 1950 censuses, in other words for the first half of the 20th Century.”

He also supports adding the citizenship question because: “the census asked about citizenship during the great migrations of the 19th and 20th Centuries because the government had a legitimate reason to want to know where people came from. We now have a large immigrant population, some of whom are legal and some of whom are not. Certainly, it is legitimate to want to determine who this population is.”

Questions in the 2020 Census must be decided by April, two years before the Census is conducted, and any Census questions must have the approval of Congress. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and other Census officials should endorse the Justice Department request and encourage lawmakers to add it to the 2020 Census.

ABOUT JAY O’CALLAGHAN

Jay O’Callaghan has worked extensively with issues involving the U.S. Census Bureau including serving as a professional staff member for the House Government Reform Census Subcommittee, as a senior legislative analyst for the Florida House of Representatives Redistricting Committee and for two U.S. House members. He is also a contributor to SFPPR News & Analysis, of the Conservative-Online-Journalism center at the Washington-based Selous Foundation for Public Policy Research.

RELATE ARTICLES:

Is Moscow ‘Deep State’ HQ?

The Emerging Arab Vote in Congressional Districts

Will Trump Save the 2020 Census?

Trump Lets You Vote on Controversial 2020 Census C…

Were Muslim Voters Behind Sanders’ Surprising Upse…

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of California Democrats who have the most to gain by counting illegal immigrants in the 2020 Census: Senator Kamala Harris, Governor Jerry Brown, and Senator Diane Feinstein.

VIDEO: Germans Fight Back Against the Migrant Violence Toward Young Girls and Women!

/in , , , , , /by

Rebel Media’s Tommy Robinson reports:

The first in our three-part series in – where we document the resistance coming from ordinary Germans who are fed up with what’s been happening to their country.

We started out in Cottbus, where we heard about the fatal stabbing of a 15 year old girl called Mia in Kandel, by a ‘child’ migrant who was taken in and looked after ‘like a son’ by her parents.

We also heard about a young boy who was stabbed in the face when trying to protect his girlfriend from a Syrian migrant who was groping her as they walked through a local park.

Keep your eyes on Germany, 2018 is the year when German women will lead the way to speak out against the horrific crimes taking place across Europe thanks to undocumented, mass migration.

FAIR: Refugee Resettlement Costs Taxpayers Billions — Welfare Biggest Chunk

/in , , , , , /by

I’m happy to see that more national immigration control groups are addressing the costly UN/US Refugee Admissions Program!  Where are you Heritage?

muslim-welfare chart

Graphic (using ORR data) is not FAIR’s or Breitbart’s, but is from a 2015 report by then Senator Sessions Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest.

John Binder writing at Breitbart tells the latest story here:

Over a five year period, American taxpayers are billed more than $8 billion for the resettlement of thousands of foreign refugees every year, a new study finds.

In research conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), analysts concluded that annual refugee resettlement costs American taxpayers about $1.8 billion a year, and over five years, about $8.8 billion.

FAIR’s research found that of the $1.8 billion annual cost of resettling refugees in the U.S., about $867 million was spent on welfare.

Continue reading here.

And, go here, for FAIR’s report.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

President Trump creates new National Vetting Center for U.S. immigrant wannabes

Headline: 25 reasons to end Somali refugee resettlement now

Oklahoma Republican Senator Lankford to headline Leftwing World Relief press event today in DC

USCRI gets big federal grant to teach senior refugees English

McCain’s DACA Fix Is Likely Dead on Arrival

Rating Politifact Objectivity: Pants on Fire False

/in , /by

The most recent Politifact story “fact-checking” President Trump is a perfect example of why no one should trust this organization — other than liberals looking to buttress their beliefs with partisan hackery. Sorry, it’s just really that bad.

This sort of breakdown can be done on fact-check after fact-check after fact-check. The assessment ranges from overtly biased negativity for Republicans and Trump and positivity for Democrats and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. This is measurable below.

During the presidential campaign, Politifact rated well-known truth-purveyor Clinton as true or mostly true 51 percent of the time. Trump came in at a grudging 9 percent. Hillary was false or pants-on-fire false 14 percent of the time, while Trump was at whopping 61 percent.

These numbers alone are more than enough to convince conservatives about the veracity of Politifact. But a quick look at the most recent attack on Trump is just a glorious exposition on either purposeful deception or utter stupidity. (As a recovering journalist, my money is on purposeful deception.)

Politifact took this quote from President Trump’s State of the Union address to do their “fact-checking:”

“Under the current broken system, a single immigrant can bring in virtually unlimited numbers of distant relatives…Under our plan, we focus on the immediate family by limiting sponsorships to spouses and minor children.”

The first problem they found with it is this:

“Neither U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents can directly petition for an aunt, uncle, cousin, niece, nephew, in-law relative or grandparent to come to the United States.”

Ummmm, right. That’s why it’s called “chain” migration, because it is not direct migration. One link leads to another which leads to another into an ever expanding universe of immigration off of the one — but not directly by the one. This is a great example of a favorite ploy of progressives; create straw men to knock down and look brilliant and so obviously right. But straw men are just that. No one is saying it is direct. It’s a chain.

The next problem comes in the following paragraph:

“Theoretically, one immigrant’s arrival in the United States could lead to the immigration of an aunt or uncle — if the first immigrant becomes a U.S. citizen and petitioned a parent, that parent could eventually become a U.S. citizen and petition his or her siblings.”

I don’t think “theoretically” means what they think it means. If it happens in real life, it is not theory. It is reality. And this indirect immigration happens constantly and is documented, usually being uncovered when an immigrant commits a crime, and they are discovered to be in the country through chain migration several steps removed from the original immigrant.

Aren’t you supposed to be Politifact? Suggestion: Work on using the right words.

Next problem, same as the first:

“…there are restrictions. No one can directly petition for an aunt, uncle, cousin, niece, nephew, in-law relative or grandparent, according to USCIS.”

But an immigrant can bring his dad, who can then bring his brother, who can then bring his son and bingo-bango-bongo, you have an uncle and a cousin through chain migration from the original immigrant.

And finally:

“Trump’s statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False.”

Except of course, it’s entirely true — factually. Impressions are not facts. This organization isn’t called Politimpression, it’s called Politifact. According to the facts (not theoreticals and not impressions) Trump’s statement is undeniably true. You can make the argument that it does not include every nuance of the immigration code — the speech was long enough — but it is factually wrong to call it false.

We’ll pass on Snopes, but the exact same problem is at work there. It is led and staffed by publicly known liberals and it does the same type of work as Politifact. In addition to the above  example of how they arrive at a totally true statement being ruled mostly false, they cherry-pick what they fact-check, never going after Hillary Clinton’s endless lies or Barack Obama’s deceptions and errors, but most often fact-checking the non-controversial true things they say.

Liberals and Democrats can rely on Politifact to buttress their worldview. Moderates and conservatives should not waste their time or be sucked in. And if you still get your local paper, tell them to stop running Politifact.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The Revolutionary Act.

Suspect in DUI Death of Colts Player Is Twice-Deported Illegal Immigrant

/in , , , , , , /by

The man suspected of killing Indianapolis Colts linebacker Edwin Jackson and Uber driver Jeffrey Monroe in a roadside crash is an illegal immigrant who has been deported two times in the past, Indiana State Police said Monday.

The driver is 37-year-old Guatemalan national Manuel Orrego-Savala. He gave police the alias Alex Cabrera Gonsales after being arrested for slamming into Jackson and Monroe as they stood on the shoulder of Interstate 70 early Sunday morning.

dcnf-logo

“Orrego-Savala is in the United States illegally and has previously been deported on two occasions, in 2007 and again in 2009,” Sgt. John Perrine said in a statement, according to the Indianapolis Star. “State police investigators are working with U.S. Federal Immigration Officials and they have placed a hold on Orrego-Savala.”

Jackson, 26, and Monroe, 54, were standing near a stopped vehicle when Orrego-Savala drove his Ford F-150 pickup onto the emergency shoulder and struck both men, according to police reports. Investigators believe Monroe had pulled over and exited the car to assist Jackson, who had become ill.

Manuel Orrego-Savala

Orrego-Savala tried to run away from the scene, but was apprehended on a nearby exit ramp, police said. He remains in custody in the Marion County Jail on charges of drunk driving, causing a death while driving intoxicated, and driving without a license.

RELATED ARTICLE: Congressman demands border wall after illegal immigrant kills NFL player

EDITORS NOTE: Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org. The featured image is by Ian Johnson/Icon Sportswire DCD/Ian Johnson/Icon Sportswire/Newscom.

VIDEO: Remembering what Bill, Hillary, Barack, Michelle and Chuck Schumer said about illegal aliens

/in , , , /by

A Whatfinger News column titled Democrats Admit They All Agree with Trump’s Immigration Plan and Building The Wall to Stop Illegals presents a video compilation of statements by past and current leaders of the Democratic Party outlining their official positions on illegal immigration. Whatfinger News notes:

Show this to every liberal who says Donald Trump is racist for wanting to secure our border.

We agree. Watch and be amazed.

EDITORS NOTE: Click here for Whatfinger Breaking News. For the latest commentary, current events. politics and political humor.

Time to Remove Socialist ‘Huddled Masses’ Plaque from Statue of Liberty

/in , , , /by

With storied statues having come down from sea to shining sea the past year, it’s time for the same to happen with something somewhat newer: the socialist-born plaque in the Statue of Liberty’s pedestal.

Yeah, it’s the one with the “huddled masses” bit. There are good reasons for it to be removed, too — above and beyond the fact that our whole nation is being turned into a huddled mass.

The plaque contains the poem “The New Colossus,” written by socialist writer Emma Lazarus. It didn’t come with the statue, a gift from France unveiled in 1886, but was slapped on smack dab in the middle of the “Progressive Era” (in 1903). This was also the period that gave us other things as American as Lazarus’ poem, such as entry into WWI, the income tax and the notion that the Constitution could be considered a “living document” (Woodrow Wilson loved to bloviate about this).

The poem remained relatively obscure for decades, and we’d be well served if it stayed that way. Alas, though, it’s now well known. What’s not so well known is that the Statue of Liberty had nothing to do with immigration. That the poem helps create the confusion that it does is enough of a reason to remove it, but there are others as well:

  1. Many now see the poem’s most famous line, “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,” as a policy statement. In fact, former secretary of state Madeleine Albright (Halfbright?) tweeted last year, “There is no fine print on the Statue of Liberty. America must remain open to people of all faiths & backgrounds. #RefugeesWelcome.”

“Fine print,” of course, is the way you speak of law or a contract. That the poem is being used this way should give everyone pause.

  1. “The New Colossus” was an example of 19th-century virtue signaling. It’s also more than troubling that policy is being influenced by sentiments that most don’t even know have a socialist pedigree. In fact, as a socialist, Lazarus could be seen as having been an (unwitting) enemy of America.

Having said this, she’s not the only 19th-century socialist shaping policy — there’s Bernie Sanders, too.

  1. Today, the huddled masses aren’t yearning to breathe free; they’re yearning for free stuff. Immigration ain’t what it used to be, and romanticizing immigrants distorts reality; being people, they include the good, the bad and the ugly. I’d sooner see the romanticizing of citizens, though truth beats incessant pep talks any day.
  2. Created by French sculptor Frédéric Auguste Bartholdi, the Statue of Liberty was originally intended to symbolize the principles of international republicanism; again, it had nothing to do with immigration. And as with the Constitution, we’d do well to return to original intent.

This is especially true because the huddled-masses bit now buttresses what I dubbed immigrationism, the bizarre notion that immigration is always good, always necessary and should be the one constant in an ever-changing universe of policy. Yet with 85 to 90 percent of today’s immigrants hailing from the Third World and 70 to 90 percent of them voting for freedom-squelching Democrats upon naturalization, there’s an irony here: The phenomenon now represented by the Statue of Liberty is destroying liberty.

This, of course, is why leftists love today’s immigration. If most of these huddled masses voted GOP, the Democrats would have long ago changed the statue’s plaque to read, “America is full. Stay wherever the heck you are.”

Regardless, immigration is far from as American as apple pie. In fact, 21 years after Lazarus’ poem was placed on the statue, immigration was severely restricted via the enactment of the National Origins Act in 1924. Back then our population was only 114 million, mind you.

Now, having almost tripled, it’s 327 million — and counting.

And with our stable fertility rate, it only grows because of immigration. When will we say enough is enough? When our population is 400 million? A half-billion? One billion? George Soros may want to make our population stats look like his bank account, but, c’mon, really, talk about “teeming shores.”

This is yet another reason why the socialist plaque should be removed from the Statue of Liberty. Oh, don’t worry, I’m not proposing it be destroyed. To echo the opponents of Confederate monuments, it can be put in a museum — where it belongs.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of the Statue of Liberty is seen in New York harbor in a June 2, 2009 photo. (AP Photo/Richard Drew)